Unwanted conduct related to a protected characteristic under s.26 Equality Act 2010, and employer liability for it. Driscoll (nee Cobbing) v V&P Global Ltd.
Constructive dismissal; last straw; the final act must contribute to the breach of trust.
Cited by
Cites
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
Harassment; s.26 EqA; Court of Appeal warned tribunals against 'cheapening' the statutory words of s.26; the unwanted conduct must reach a high threshold of gravity that truly violates dignity or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment.
Cited by
References found in the judgments’ text, with the number of paragraphs in which each case is mentioned. Not a classification: how a case was treated is recorded under Later history.
EAT held that equality and harassment training so stale that it can no longer be regarded as having been 'reasonably practicable' does not satisfy the reasonable steps defence under s.109(4) EqA. Employers must keep training current and reinforce it periodically; a single historic session will not suffice. [Summary not yet checked against the judgment.]
Discrimination; toilets; inclusive policy based on gender identity was objectively justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, though harassment claims can still succeed on specific facts. The judgment attempts to maintain terminology consistent with the Supreme Court's 'For Women Scotland' decision. [Summary not yet checked against the judgment.]